Do modern day architects really learn anything

[Patrick_Mucci]

from other contemporary architects ?

In reading about the ODG's they seem to frequently visit with and discuss ongoing projects with the architect of record.

Pine Valley and other courses come to mind.

It seemed that the original architect incorporated features either suggested by other architects or that they incorporated features observed in other architects work.

Today, it seems that architects are more at "arms length"

There don't appear to be too many invitations or site visits by other architects.

I'd be curious to know what some of our contributing architects have learned from other contemporary architects, not as mentors, such as Dye and Doak, but, as competitors.

Surely, good to great ideas aren't confined to just one architect.

[Garland Bayley]

What do they do at their professional association meetings? Usually that is the type of place where colleagues of the same field exchange information.

[Patrick_Mucci]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

[Jason Connor]

I bet Jack learned something from Tom at Sebonack.

[Mike_Young]

I think there are a few where we talk to each other and will go to sites etc .   But there are several different types of architects that exist today.  The Signatures are fed mainly by large marketing fees disguised as design fees.  These guys have agents and sales people that will cut each others privates off.  And so for someone like me to listen to someone that has been in that type of organization ; it doesn't interest me at all.  I learn more from shapers who have worked for various designers. 
Often others have so many preconceived notions about how some guy works that they don't let themselves go see others work.  It's a weird group.

[Peter Pallotta]

Pat - it's a good question, but I wonder: what do any of us, past a certain age, learn from other professionals? In your business, would you say you often talk to colleagues (essentially, competitors) and truly learn something you didn't know before? Isn't it more a case of recognizing different ways -- some better, more efficacious, and some less -- of doing things? I know we often praise 'continual learning' and 'openness to ideas" -- but I'm not sure we actually want or are even capable of incorporating a truly new approach into our existing (and time tested, and successful) approaches.

Peter

[Garland Bayley]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

PM,

I thought you would be aware that they don't just sit in rooms. That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.

[Tom_Doak]

I think there are a few where we talk to each other and will go to sites etc .   But there are several different types of architects that exist today.  The Signatures are fed mainly by large marketing fees disguised as design fees.  These guys have agents and sales people that will cut each others privates off.  And so for someone like me to listen to someone that has been in that type of organization ; it doesn't interest me at all.  I learn more from shapers who have worked for various designers. 
Often others have so many preconceived notions about how some guy works that they don't let themselves go see others work.  It's a weird group.

I think Mike nailed the answer here.

I've visited sites that Coore & Crenshaw were working on a few times before Streamsong, or Pete Dye of course.  And I've had a handful of architects come out to see what we were doing, though it's nearly always the younger guys, and not the guys with the plaid jackets.  [Personally, I just don't know if I'm welcome unless invited, because I've established myself as an outsider.]

Also, when we were all busy just a few short years ago, nobody had much time for it.  Jack Nicklaus had 25-30 projects going at once!  People bashed him here for not going to see Sand Hills when he was working at Dismal River -- but he only had two or three days on site at Dismal River.  How much of that time do you think his client wants him to spend next door?

What I DO see is that all of my former interns are staying very busy working for other designers and helping shape their courses.  That's where the transfer of knowledge is taking place.  Even Ian Andrew, who I consider a friend, spends more time with my associates at the Renaissance Cup than he does with me. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat - it's a good question, but I wonder: what do any of us, past a certain age, learn from other professionals?

I guess that's a function of how active and current you want to remain.

In your business, would you say you often talk to colleagues (essentially, competitors) and truly learn something you didn't know before?

Yes, the need to remain current is critical in these ultra-competitive times.

I think there's difference in remaining current technologically/educationally versus the cultivation of talent.

I just see it as a different discipline.


Isn't it more a case of recognizing different ways -- some better, more efficacious, and some less -- of doing things?


Maybe that and more.
The creative process is quite unique.
It doesn't tend to be linear.

Would the 7th hole at PV have been a good hole without HHA ?
I think so, but, I think the introduction of HHA elevated the hole exponentially.


I know we often praise 'continual learning' and 'openness to ideas" -- but I'm not sure we actually want or are even capable of incorporating a truly new approach into our existing (and time tested, and successful) approaches.

Now is that a function of a lack of vision, a lack of flexibility or no absence of ego ?

When you put this question in the context of an "artiste" is there an inherent resistance to the creativity of others ?

Does a great architect have to be open to the creative thoughts of others, or can he remain within his own sphere ?

I would think that he could remain within his own sphere and produce outstanding work.
Would that work be enhanced vis a vis "consulting architects" ?
Not co-venture partners, but independent consulting peers ?

It seemed to have worked for Crump, but, then again he was a novice.
A talented novice, but a novice just the same.

My thoughts are, in these competitive times, that retaining or inviting a peer consultant would not be well received, by the owner-developer, or the contracted architect.

[Patrick_Mucci]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

PM,

I thought you would be aware that they don't just sit in rooms. That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.

GJ,

Would you cite the last five (5) association meetings and the courses in progress that they met at, and who the hosting architect was ?

[Mike_Young]

What I DO see is that all of my former interns are staying very busy working for other designers and helping shape their courses.  That's where the transfer of knowledge is taking place.  Even Ian Andrew, who I consider a friend, spends more time with my associates at the Renaissance Cup than he does with me. 

Definitely agree with this....and as for Ian, those poor guys have been working with him for years trying to show him how to be cool...I hope they don't give up on him...he came South and had to bring a translator to breakfast....

[Tom_Doak]

My thoughts are, in these competitive times, that retaining or inviting a peer consultant would not be well received, by the owner-developer, or the contracted architect.

Very true.  When Mark Parsinen was just starting Kingsbarns, and I happened to be visiting St. Andrews, he invited me to spend a couple of days looking at the plans for the course and kicking around some ideas with him, in the spirit of Pine Valley, etc.  Which I did -- only to find out that Kyle Phillips was not happy about it at all, and felt threatened that I had talked to Mark.  [The two of them were always a bit apart on that subject, actually, because both of them thought of the course as their own design.]

I'm pretty certain, though, that a couple of the things I showed Mark walking around The Old Course were translated into the creation of Kingsbarns.

[Mike_Young]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

PM,

I thought you would be aware that they don't just sit in rooms. That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.

GJ,

Would you cite the last five (5) association meetings and the courses in progress that they met at, and who the hosting architect was ?

Pat,
Who is "they"?  Are you talking about some group of Architects?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

I've visited sites that Coore & Crenshaw were working on a few times before Streamsong, or Pete Dye of course. 

Tom, you enjoy a special relationship with both C&C and Pete Dye.
When you visited those working sites, did you offer any suggestions ?
And, did they solicit any suggestions from you ?

And I've had a handful of architects come out to see what we were doing, though it's nearly always the younger guys, and not the guys with the plaid jackets. 

Did any of them offer suggestions, or were they there to just observe and learn ?
And, did you solicit any suggestions from them ?

[Personally, I just don't know if I'm welcome unless invited, because I've established myself as an outsider.]

Tom, it's unusual for a Pro or Superintendent to just show up unannounced.
Most visiting Pros and Superintendents call their counterpart prior to visiting as a courtesy.
I think that's SOP in the golf world, so that's understandable.

Also, when we were all busy just a few short years ago, nobody had much time for it.  Jack Nicklaus had 25-30 projects going at once!  People bashed him here for not going to see Sand Hills when he was working at Dismal River -- but he only had two or three days on site at Dismal River.  How much of that time do you think his client wants him to spend next door?

The client has a reasonable expectation that the contracted architect will devote the time necessary to perform his intended task.
But, in terms of CE (continuing education) and creativity, doesn't the architect have a personal obligation to visit a site deemed revolutionary, unusual or spectacular ?   To quote the bible: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."
Sand Hills would seem to have been revolutionary, unusual and spectacular enough to warrant a visit

What I DO see is that all of my former interns are staying very busy working for other designers and helping shape their courses.  That's where the transfer of knowledge is taking place.  Even Ian Andrew, who I consider a friend, spends more time with my associates at the Renaissance Cup than he does with me. 

Certain Pros and Superintendents are known for producing exceptional assistants who go on to become head professionals and head superintendents.
You and your organization have obviously been a great training ground as well.

But, I'm interested in you and your peers, THE architects of record, and how you fellows interact with one another in terms of advice, suggestions and/or criticism.

Thanks

[Patrick_Mucci]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

PM,

I thought you would be aware that they don't just sit in rooms. That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.

GJ,

Would you cite the last five (5) association meetings and the courses in progress that they met at, and who the hosting architect was ?

Pat,
Who is "they"?  Are you talking about some group of Architects?  

Mike,

Garland Bailey stated that:

"they don't just sit in rooms.
That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.
[/u]


So you're best bet is ask Garland who exactly he was referencing when he stated that "they" don't just sit in rooms.  That "their" meetings ........

I'm sure he can explain and detail who "they" are and where and what "their" meetings are about.

[Mike_Young]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

PM,

I thought you would be aware that they don't just sit in rooms. That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.

GJ,

Would you cite the last five (5) association meetings and the courses in progress that they met at, and who the hosting architect was ?

Pat,
Who is "they"?  Are you talking about some group of Architects?  

Mike,

Garland Bailey stated that:

"they don't just sit in rooms.
That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.
[/u]


So you're best bet is ask Garland who exactly he was referencing when he stated that "they" don't just sit in rooms.  That "their" meetings ........

I'm sure he can explain and detail who "they" are and where and what "their" meetings are about.

Hey Garland...

[Peter Pallotta]

"When you put this question in the context of an "artiste" is there an inherent resistance to the creativity of others ?"

Pat - I think that's a very interesting -- and relevant -- distinction.  The quality and degree of genuine 'openness' when it comes to creative temperament and taste and vision is the real question.

We use Mr. Crump as an example, but his status as "a novice" is a point that can't be stressed enough, IMO.

Peter

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

I get lost in all the green ink so I'm not going there.

I think it's sad that so many architects and superintendents and pros feel threatened by a visit from a fellow professional, that they have to announce their presence or be invited to come.  I have noticed that plenty of other architects go see my work after it's done, and I'm happy that they do.  It bums me out when occasionally someone questions one of my design decisions to the client ... it's happened, and I don't think it's very professional of them ... but for them to have general opinions of the course and state them publicly is fine by me.  After all, I've already done the same for their courses, in print. 

When I've visited others' sites, I generally keep my ideas to myself, unless it's a close friend, or they really ask and I'm comfortable telling them.  When others have visited my courses, it's the same in reverse; I try to put them at ease and tell them they can ask anything they want, but they seldom say they disagree with any particular thing we're doing.  The same goes for my many golf friends who might turn up for a visit ... we love having people come and provide some feedback while we're working on a project.

[Ian Andrew]

Even Ian Andrew, who I consider a friend, spends more time with my associates at the Renaissance Cup than he does with me.  

Tom,
Be careful what you wish for. I'll follow you like a lost puppy at the next one.   Although that assumes you're short of players to fill out the matches.

He came South and had to bring a translator to breakfast....

Mike,

“Y’all think yur funy”

I'd be curious to know what some of our contributing architects have learned from other contemporary architects, not as mentors, such as Dye and Doak, but, as competitors.

Pat,

I’ve sought out just about every architect that has ever interested me which includes all your favourites. Some are phone conversations, others involve days spent together, and when I’m lucky it’s on a course where the designer can share important stories or ideas to increase my understanding of the “entire” project. For example Tom was kind enough to walk me through the earthworks required to accomplish Ballyneal while out there together.

I’ve visited a number of courses in construction from Sebonac through to Old Macdonald and Castle Stuart and walked with either the designer or key member of the design team. BTW I don’t make suggestions. But I certainly ask a lot of questions to learn as much as I can from them. I find designers very flattered to be visited and very generous with their time and information.

I also seek out restoration and renovation projects which fly under your radar. I share historical information when I can actually help. I love to spend time learning about the decision process, because much of that is very complicated and "grey." For example I visited Merion, Quaker Ridge and LACC mid-construction because I wanted to see the detailing.
  
I’ll never have enough answers and anything someone else can teach me is something else I can draw from. Some architects are very open with sharing their knowledge and others are not. I find the vast majority are open and the younger generation of current architects particularly so.

What none of you will ever fully understand is someone the most brilliant people on very specific aspects of golf design are not talked about here at all. I love the “favourites” too, but I think there are more subtle aspects that some others are really good at and I seek them too.  Golf architecture is far more than a routing, bunker placement and bunker style, but that’s the depth that any people stop at. If you want to learn it all, you need to seek out a lot of architects, builders, superintendents and even the occasional engineer if you really want to know what you’re doing.

The point I want to make to you pat is there are more out there like me than you would think. The problem is most of us work under the GCA radar and “all” architects are painted here by the careers of about twenty.  

[Garland Bayley]

GJ,

Don't know if sitting in a room far removed from a course allows for the same quantity and quality of information exchanged that would occur on site.

I'm sure that AWT, Colt and others could have met Crump in a hotel or restaurant in Philadelphia or Camden, but, it's not the same as being on site.

PM,

I thought you would be aware that they don't just sit in rooms. That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.

GJ,

Would you cite the last five (5) association meetings and the courses in progress that they met at, and who the hosting architect was ?

Pat,
Who is "they"?  Are you talking about some group of Architects?  

Mike,

Garland Bailey stated that:

"they don't just sit in rooms.
That their meetings are typically associated with a golf course or two since there have been mentions of playing golf at these meetings.
[/u]


So you're best bet is ask Garland who exactly he was referencing when he stated that "they" don't just sit in rooms.  That "their" meetings ........

I'm sure he can explain and detail who "they" are and where and what "their" meetings are about.

Well Patrick, either the ASGCA lies on their website, or you are just being a moron like normal.

"ASGCA Annual Meetings have a storied history dating back to December of 1947 in Pinehurst, N.C. Since that time, the ASGCA Annual Meeting has grown to become the signature event for interaction, innovation and education relating to golf course architecture in the United States. ASGCA Annual Meetings are always selected within close proximity to the world's greatest golf courses. As such, ASGCA members are able to learn more about the game's history and continued evolution by visiting and playing some of the best courses the game has to offer."

[Patrick_Mucci]

GJ,

I asked you to list the last five (5) meeting sites, the courses in progress at that site and the hosting architect.

You've failed to do so, because your claim is erroneous, irrelevant and disruptive to this thread, which is your intent..

I'm not interested in 1947.

I asked you to list the last five (5) meeting sites, the courses in progress at those sites and the hosting architect.

Once again you're attempting to divert and disrupt a thread that others have deemed interesting.
I know that I'm not the only one to notice your behavior pattern, since I've received emails and IM's pointing out the obvious.

List the last five (5) sites, the courses in progress at those sites and the hosting architects or just shut up.

[Sam Morrow]

Let's just hug it out.

[Garland Bayley]

GJ,

I asked you to list the last five (5) meeting sites, the courses in progress at that site and the hosting architect.

You've failed to do so, because your claim is erroneous, irrelevant and disruptive to this thread, which is your intent..

I'm not interested in 1947.

I asked you to list the last five (5) meeting sites, the courses in progress at those sites and the hosting architect.

Once again you're attempting to divert and disrupt a thread that others have deemed interesting.
I know that I'm not the only one to notice your behavior pattern, since I've received emails and IM's pointing out the obvious.

List the last five (5) sites, the courses in progress at those sites and the hosting architects or just shut up.

You are boring us with your nonsense again. And I am bored communicating with someone that uses such diversionary nonsense.
Bye for now.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

I get lost in all the green ink so I'm not going there.

I can understand how some of my questions make you uncomfortable  

I think it's sad that so many architects and superintendents and pros feel threatened by a visit from a fellow professional, that they have to announce their presence or be invited to come. 

Tom, that's just the way it is in the golf world.
You have to remember, being a Head Pro or Head Superintendent isn't the most secure position in the world.

I have noticed that plenty of other architects go see my work after it's done, and I'm happy that they do.  It bums me out when occasionally someone questions one of my design decisions to the client ... it's happened, and I don't think it's very professional of them ... but for them to have general opinions of the course and state them publicly is fine by me.  After all, I've already done the same for their courses, in print. 

I'd agree.   Going to the client seems improper, but, general comments/criticisms seem fair.

When I've visited others' sites, I generally keep my ideas to myself, unless it's a close friend, or they really ask and I'm comfortable telling them.  When others have visited my courses, it's the same in reverse; I try to put them at ease and tell them they can ask anything they want, but they seldom say they disagree with any particular thing we're doing.  The same goes for my many golf friends who might turn up for a visit ... we love having people come and provide some feedback while we're working on a project.

I think there's a great value in being able to run ideas through a filter, with the architect being the filter.

The question is, would you consider a design change offered by an outsider ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

You are boring us with your nonsense again.
And I am bored communicating with someone that uses such diversionary nonsense.

Let me rephrase that for you:

You made a statement.
I challenged it and asked you to substantiate your statement.
You can't substantiate it,
so rather than admit that you were wrong and didn't know what you were talking about,
you claim you're bored and run away claiming that I'm employing diversionary tactics, when that's been your modus operendi from the begining.

We get your phony act Garland


Bye for now.

Goodbye and good riddance